MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999034462 · doi:10.1182/blood.2019002364

Long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism

2020· review· en· W2999034462 on OpenAlexafffund
Clive Kearon, Susan R. Kahn

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcMaster UniversityThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineContraindicationPulmonary embolismCompression stockingsConcomitantThrombosisLow molecular weight heparinSurgeryDeep veinVenous thrombosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most important decision in the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is how long to anticoagulate. VTE provoked by a reversible risk factor, or a first unprovoked isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT), generally should be treated for 3 months. VTE provoked by a persistent or progressive risk factor (eg, cancer), or a second unprovoked proximal DVT or PE, is generally treated indefinitely. First unprovoked proximal DVT or PE may be treated for 3 to 6 months or indefinitely. Male sex, presentation as PE (particularly if concomitant proximal DVT), a positive d-dimer test after stopping anticoagulation, an antiphospholipid antibody, low risk of bleeding, and patient preference favor indefinite anticoagulation. The type of indefinite anticoagulation is of secondary importance. Low-dose oral Xa inhibitors are convenient and are thought to have a lower risk of bleeding; they are less suitable if there is a higher risk for recurrence. For cancer-associated VTE, we now prefer full-dose oral Xa inhibitors over low-molecular-weight heparin, with gastrointestinal lesions being a relative contraindication. Graduated compression stockings are not routinely indicated after DVT, but are encouraged if there is persistent leg swelling or if a trial of stockings improves symptoms. Medications have a limited role in the treatment of postthrombotic syndrome. After PE, patients should have clinical surveillance for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), with ventilation-perfusion scanning and echocardiography being the initial diagnostic tests if CTEPH is a concern. Patients with CTEPH and other symptomatic patients with extensive residual perfusion defects should be evaluated for endarterectomy, balloon pulmonary angioplasty, or vasodilator therapies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations111
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207